
特朗普公开驳斥司法部结论,坚称林肯纪念堂倒影池损毁系“蓄意破坏”
美国司法部因承包商施工缺陷撤销对前奥运选手的刑事指控后,总统特朗普在社交媒体上表示“百分之百不同意”其任命的联邦检察官,凸显行政分支内部罕见分歧。
美国司法部于周五正式请求法院撤销对前奥运皮划艇运动员戴维·赫恩的刑事指控,认定林肯纪念堂倒影池新铺设的内衬大面积剥落,主因是承包商“仓促且存在缺陷的安装”,而非赫恩的破坏行为。该决定由华盛顿特区联邦检察官珍妮·皮罗做出,她在法庭文件中指出,内政部在起诉后提供的补充文件显示,内衬在安装过程中即反复出现故障,且剥落现象遍布整个池底,包括“破坏者不太可能尝试剥离的池中央区域”。
总统特朗普随即在周六通过其社交平台“真相社交”公开表达强烈不满,称“我百分之百不同意珍妮·皮罗的看法”,并质问“我不知道她在想什么?”特朗普承认项目“可能存在一些承包商方面的问题”,但坚持“主要损害是由破坏者造成的”,并将此案定性为“一桩纯粹的蓄意破坏事件”。他还提及附近草坪上出现的“86 47”字样,该数字组合被其支持者解读为针对总统的死亡威胁。为佐证其立场,特朗普发布了一段近四分钟的监控视频,声称画面显示有人用刀具切割内衬,但多家媒体指出,从远距离拍摄的视频中无法清晰确认破坏行为的发生。
皮罗办公室的撤诉决定,使司法部此前高调宣扬的追责行动遭遇尴尬逆转。法庭文件显示,负责翻新工程的承包商大西洋工业涂料公司获得了一份价值逾1400万美元的无需竞标合同,为总面积约6.8万平方英尺的池底铺设新保护层。工程于5月初启动,因降雨和伸缩缝问题延误,为赶在7月4日美国独立250周年庆典前完工而承受巨大压力。然而,完工后数日内,池水因藻类泛滥变绿,蓝色内衬开始起泡、剥落,漂浮于水面。
此案引发的争议已超越个案本身。皮罗因撤诉而面临来自保守派评论员和法律界人士的严厉批评,有人公开要求其道歉、被免职甚至取消律师资格,指责其“出于政治原因仓促提起刑事诉讼”。赫恩的律师团队则声明,皮罗关于其办公室被内政部误导的说法“纯属无稽之谈”,并称正在评估法律救济途径。分析人士指出,围绕倒影池翻新工程的纠纷,已成为特朗普改造首都华盛顿计划的一个缩影,该计划还包括拆除白宫东翼建造宴会厅、在林肯纪念堂与阿灵顿国家公墓之间修建巨型拱门等项目。
| 大西洋/英语圈媒体 | −0.40 | critical |
|---|---|---|
| 欧洲大陆媒体 | −0.60 | critical |
| 中国媒体 | 0.00 | neutral |
The Trump administration pointed the finger at an athlete to cover its own negligence, but the truth came out.
By focusing on the administration's earlier accusations and subsequent admission, the narrative constructs a clear arc of falsehood exposed, making the government appear deceitful.
The fact that Hearn was seen grabbing at the liner and continued after a park employee told him to stop is omitted by many outlets, which would complicate the narrative of complete innocence.
Trump's controversial pond turned out to be a mess of his own making; the athlete was just a convenient scapegoat.
The narrative emphasizes the contrast between the administration's strong accusations and the ultimate finding that its own team was at fault, using the term 'controversial pond' to frame the entire project as a Trump debacle.
The specific technical details of the flawed installation are omitted, keeping the focus on Trump's political embarrassment rather than a neutral engineering failure.
The US federal prosecutor concluded the damage was due to poor installation; the case is closed.
By presenting the facts in a dry, neutral tone and avoiding any reference to the Trump administration's earlier statements, the narrative implies that such internal US affairs are trivial and not worthy of judgment.
The political context of Trump's involvement and the false accusations are omitted, preventing readers from forming a critical view of the US administration.